June 2018 AOR - join here
- Thread starter andy108
- Start date
Well, you know we literally can't do anything about it, so why not enjoy your life in this process?
Don't know about him but in some cases life is not as enjoyable as you could expect
hence why we are disposed for immigration. Of course that's not referencing every case but it happens, although I have to say the support in this thread has been amazing and it's great to see dream by dream coming true, even if slowly. We will all get there guys! just a little bit more to go Thank you!
Another question please: My 1st job was an 8-month term employment at a university in Canada as a Research Technician. This is what I wrote under "details of employment":
Another question please: My 1st job was an 8-month term employment at a university in Canada as a Research Technician. This is what I wrote under "details of employment":
- Type of Employment: Full time, term appointment.
- Duration of term: 5th May, 2017 up to 31st January, 2018, with possibility of extension.
Do I need to mention "term appointment" and what that term means? I've seen in sample reference letters people write "Full time, permanent". So, I thought of including this detail. I'm not including my offer letter (as it wasn't asked for), so if they have a question of whether or not my job was permanent, this is the only place to find that information. But I'm not sure if that's something they want to know. I did provide the start and end date ( I left the job before the term ended).
Could you please answer this question of mine: My 1st job was an 8-month term employment at a university in Canada as a Research Technician. This is what I wrote under "details of employment":
- Type of Employment: Full time, term appointment.
- Duration of term: 5th May, 2017 up to 31st January, 2018, with possibility of extension.
Do I need to mention "term appointment" and what that term means? I've seen in sample reference letters people write "Full time, permanent". So, I thought of including this detail. I'm not including my offer letter (as it wasn't asked for), so if they have a question of whether or not my job was permanent, this is the only place to find that information. But I'm not sure if that's something they want to know. I did provide the start and end date ( I left the job before the term ended).
You have been so helpful! Thank you SO much!!
Another question please: My 1st job was an 8-month term employment at a university in Canada as a Research Technician. This is what I wrote under "details of employment":
Another question please: My 1st job was an 8-month term employment at a university in Canada as a Research Technician. This is what I wrote under "details of employment":
- Type of Employment: Full time, term appointment.
- Duration of term: 5th May, 2017 up to 31st January, 2018, with possibility of extension.
Do I need to mention "term appointment" and what that term means? I've seen in sample reference letters people write "Full time, permanent". So, I thought of including this detail. I'm not including my offer letter (as it wasn't asked for), so if they have a question of whether or not my job was permanent, this is the only place to find that information. But I'm not sure if that's something they want to know. I did provide the start and end date ( I left the job before the term ended).
Given that this is a position is in a Canadian university it is possible that the Visa officer is aware of kind of appointments in Canadian university based on his experience in a previous application. Honestly, I do not know what does "term appointment" mean. It is also possible that particular visa officer is also not aware of the terminology. In that case you may have to include the explanation in the letter of explanation on what does the term mean.
So if you think mentioning term appointment is important do that and explain in the letter of explanation.
Hello! I had just received my GCMS notes and I would like to seek some help. For my eligibility, it says "review required".
The notes regarding eligibility were very positive overall. 1 year canadian work experience confirmed and points awarded; education confirmed and points awarded; funds met; age checked; my CRS point remained unchanged after calculation. However, I applied as common-law and chose spouse not accompanying. Hence under my note, it says"RECOMMENDATION: Review Required MI3 SUMMARY NOTES: OFFICER FOR YOUR REVIEW. DEP IS NOT ACCOMPANYING IN GCMS, APPEARS DEP IS IN CANADA. APPEARS PA HAS MET REQUIREMENTS: A11.2: Appears Met R87.1: CEC MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS- Appears Met RPRF: Complete
Why exactly would my spouse not accompanying makes my application "review required"? I had never seen this before... Thanks.
The notes regarding eligibility were very positive overall. 1 year canadian work experience confirmed and points awarded; education confirmed and points awarded; funds met; age checked; my CRS point remained unchanged after calculation. However, I applied as common-law and chose spouse not accompanying. Hence under my note, it says"RECOMMENDATION: Review Required MI3 SUMMARY NOTES: OFFICER FOR YOUR REVIEW. DEP IS NOT ACCOMPANYING IN GCMS, APPEARS DEP IS IN CANADA. APPEARS PA HAS MET REQUIREMENTS: A11.2: Appears Met R87.1: CEC MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS- Appears Met RPRF: Complete
Why exactly would my spouse not accompanying makes my application "review required"? I had never seen this before... Thanks.
From what I can read is that the officer has written he thinks Dependent is already with you in Canada although you have chosen not accompanying. Highlighted text in red.
I added the second bullet "Duration of term". I just don't know if it's important to mention things like that. Say my job was permanent, would I have needed to include it?
I'm taking a wild guess based on the note without any info regarding your case but it seems like your dependent, listed as not accomanying, is already in Canada by other means but not as a permanent resident so maybe they think he/she is going to stay illegally with you after you move?
My spouse is here because he went to the same university as I did and he is right now staying in Canada with his own PGWP....
My spouse is here because he went to the same university as I did and he is right now staying in Canada with his own PGWP... He's PGWP still has another 2 years to go so he could totally immigrate himself or I can sponsor him after I land. I just feel this is weird that my eligibility is now review required because of this.
They can't reject my application because I chose "common-law partner not accompanying" right???
But I am glad that all others (work experience, degree, age, language...) seem fine.
It could have been worse if they question other things.
I honestly doubt they would based only on that. Maybe the "review required" is there so the senior officer does double check times, permits and all that stuff.